Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/T-ara discography/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:34, 3 June 2016 (UTC).

T-ara discography

 * Nominator(s): Simon (talk) 05:16, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The list focuses on the discography of South Korean girl group T-ara. Personally speaking, this list is suitable for a FL candidate as it is comprehensive and fully detailed, as well as references are OK and reliable. Simon (talk) 05:16, 15 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Support Not sure if there is any minor issues I'm not being aware of, but the article looks good and well-sourced. The lead paragraph covers the topic nicely.--TerryAlex (talk) 14:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Support. I believe this now meets the featured list criteria. Great work! Random86 (talk) 07:53, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comments: the archive links by Cyberbot II on the article talk page should be checked. Contains Korean text and Contains Japanese text} could be merged by using Contains special characters with custom options. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:14, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying those issues. I have addressed all. — Simon (talk) 15:08, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * One more thing: the  parameter in titles that contain Japanese or Korean should be   or  . – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 02:06, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Simon (talk) 03:54, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * So your vote is support or...? — Simon (talk) 16:21, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure thing,, I support. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Source review:


 * Spotchecks: refs 17, 36, 50, 64, 73 checked; 50 has a problem- it claims to cite that the Korean hot 100 stopped in July 2014, but unless I'm missing something that ref, while showing the purported last week, doesn't explicitly show that there were never any weeks after
 * Ref 50 fixed. Simon (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Formatting: A lot of the online refs seem to be missing accessdates; at first I thought you were omitting them when you had an archive, but even when you don't you miss some.
 * Accessdates have been added. Simon (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Comprehensive: Check. -- Pres N  21:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the source checking. Simon (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Comments by AJona1992
 * Very well written and detailed article, I couldn't find any flaws in the article. There is, however, a CS1 error with FN#50; once this is fixed I can support the article. Best – jona  ✉ 13:43, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks so much! Simon (talk) 14:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I now support the article's promotion. Best – jona  ✉ 18:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Alright, source review passed, promoting. -- Pres N  15:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.